The commission formally asked to limit construction near the Colorado, set aside land for habitat restoration and parkland, require bird-friendly building design, cap building height, and include a larger share of affordable housing in any residential additions. It also calls for greater public outreach, and a ban on data centers and semiconductor manufacturing plants. Materials used to develop the plan were made available online.
Environmental Commission members and some city residents have criticized aspects of Austin’s agreement with plans for the Dog’s Head’s redevelopment. (Screenshot courtesy city of Austin)The city spokesperson said any variances to the Dog’s Head development agreement would be subject to the director of Austin Development Services, not resident board or commission review, and didn’t confirm how the agreement could potentially be amended in response to the July recommendations. They also said an environmental resource inventory, or ERI, wasn’t required for the Dog’s Head this spring.
“Applicants submit ERIs as part of a development application to demonstrate compliance with substantive Land Development Code requirements. An ERI is not required as part of negotiating a development agreement,” they said in an email.
At the June meeting, Bristol labeled Austin and Endeavor’s push for extensive development plans on the east side as “a classic example of environmental racism.” She and others also stated frustrations with another civic corporate partnership without full transparency.
“This is egregious, and I don’t understand why we keep bending over backwards for Fortune 100 companies to give them tax incentives and to remove our oversight for 45 years. It is just so backwards,” Chair Mariana Krueger said. “We’ve seen that with Samsung, we’ve seen that with Tesla; all we’ve gotten are ecological destruction and workplace violations. When are we going to learn?”